DOCSLIB.ORG

Reinterpreting Eros in Plato's Symposium

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Reinterpreting Eros in Plato's Symposium Reinterpreting Eros in Plato’s Symposium Master’s Thesis Presented to The Faculty of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences Brandeis University Department of Ancient Greek and Roman Studies Leonard Muellner, Advisor In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for Master’s Degree by Peter Caccavale May 2012 Acknowledgements I would like to thank everyone who encouraged me throughout this process including my family, friends and colleagues. Without your support and guidance I am sure this thesis would never have been successful. I owe special thanks to my advisor, Professor Leonard Muellner, whose continued guidance and suggestions transformed this thesis from scattered thoughts to a structured work. From weekly meetings to editing a constant stream of drafts, your help was invaluable and I am very thankful for all of your advice. I would also like to thank my readers, Professor Patricia Johnston and Professor Cheryl Walker. I appreciate the time you took to read such a large thesis and your suggestions and comments were instrumental in fixing my errors in both grammar and logic. Finally, I am happy to be able to thank Christina for her unwavering support and encouragement. By now you have probably heard more about Plato and Greek grammar than you ever would have wanted, but you have also added more to this work than I think you realize. P.G.C. ii ABSTRACT Redefining Eros in Plato’s Symposium A thesis presented to the Department of Classical Studies Graduate School of Arts and Sciences Brandeis University Waltham, Massachusetts By Peter Caccavale At the heart of the Symposium there lies the conceptual problem of defining the term eros in a manner that remains faithful to both its linguistic and philosophical context. Beginning with the conversation between Apollodorus and his unnamed stranger and ending with Socrates departing for the Lyceum, eros remains the sole focus of the entire work. With such a burden of importance placed upon one single word and its subsequent meanings and interpretations, it is useful to apply a consistent and distinct methodology, whether to an overarching global theme or an individual speech, in order to reveal the subtle syntactical selections Plato makes to support his larger philosophical argument. The common conceptualization of eros applied by scholars has tried to achieve a universal understanding, one overarching definition that can be applied to any context in which eros must have a one-to-one English equivalent. This technique has led to a problem in modern scholarship, in which translations vary to such a degree that the true iii meaning of eros has become lost in the process. The cause of such confusion is not due to a lack of logical analysis, but a lack of a logical methodology on which to base such analysis. The goal must be to strike a balance between the overarching concept of eros that pervaded the Greek consciousness, and the individual uses evidenced in the text of the Symposium. This paper proposes a new methodology which will be founded on the work of Ferdinand de Saussure and his theories of general linguistics. This approach yields a new interpretation of the word that both defines its individual meaning and the greater philosophical lesson Plato is attempting to convey. Eros is the desire of the soul, a desire that has future aspirations of finding a partner in whom one can contemplate the true meaning of beauty. It inspires, instructs, and guides those whom it touches toward immortality through fame, procreation, and wisdom. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1: Introduction and Statement of Methodology………………………………….1 Chapter 2: Setting a Global Baseline…………………………………………………….11 Section A: Eros is always of something…………………………………………11 Section B: The erastes/eromenos relationship is the expression of eros………...17 Section C: Eros is a causal agent………………………………………………...25 Section D: Eros is morally neutral…………………………………………….…31 Section E: Eros desires through social relationships…………………………….46 Section F: Philia is the relationship through which eros obtains desires………..61 Section G: Epithumia is the desire of the body…………………………………..72 Chapter 3: Deviation from the Baseline through Parole………………………………...86 Section A: Eros is self-predicative………………………………………………87 Section B: Eros partakes of epithumia…………………………………………..92 Section C: The true nature of epithumia………………………………………..102 Section D: Epithumia leads to eros……………………………………………..111 Section E: Philia is the path to immortality…………………………………….121 Chapter 4: Interpretation………………………………………………………………..135 Section A: The difference between eros and erotics…………………………...136 Section B: Socrates is eros……………………………………………………...145 Section C: Socrates is the helper and the hindrance……………………………154 Chapter 5: Conclusion………………………………………………………………….158 Bibliography……………………………………………………………………………162 v Chapter 1: Introduction and Statement of Methodology At the heart of the Symposium there lies the conceptual problem of defining the term eros in a manner that remains faithful to both its linguistic and philosophical context. Beginning with the conversation between Apollodorus and his unnamed stranger and ending with Socrates departing for the Lyceum, eros remains the sole focus of the entire work. With such a burden of importance placed upon one single word and its subsequent meanings and interpretations, it is useful to apply a consistent and distinct methodology, whether to an overarching global theme or an individual speech, in order to reveal the subtle syntactical selections Plato makes to support his larger philosophical argument. Eros, as defined by Lidell and Scott’s Greek lexicon, is “love of a thing, desire for it.” This definition of eros as both love and desire of an object captures the essence of the Greek within a modern English equivalent that is conveniently succinct for translational purposes. This conceptualization of eros has been applied to the Symposium by scholars in several ways in order to achieve a universal understanding, one overarching definition that can be applied to any context in which eros must have a one-to-one English equivalent. This technique has led to a problem in modern scholarship, in which translations vary to such a degree that the true meaning of eros has become lost in the process. The cause of such confusion is not due to a lack of logical analysis, but a lack of a logical methodology on which to base such analysis. 1 For example, in his commentary, Kenneth Dover presents the following definition: This word, which can denote any very strong desire (e.g. for victory) and is used also by Homer…to denote appetite for food and drink, usually means ‘love’ in the sense which that word bears in our expressions ‘be in love (with…)’…and ‘fall in love (with…)’: that is, intense desire for a particular individual as a sexual partner.1 In contrast, R.E. Allen claimed “Eros meant love in the sense of romantic love, and included sexual passion. But Eros could be used broadly enough in Greek—Diotima will so use it—to include desire in all its forms. It may be contrasted with Philia, love in the sense of affection or friendship or liking.”2 Leo Strauss claimed “Eros, strictly understood, is love of human beings, a desire to be together with a human being or human beings whom one loves, and this means the being together of bodies, not in any narrow sense.”3 In addition to these examples, other definitions of eros, as both love and desire, vary as wildly and haphazardly as suits the author’s particular style or poet license. Frisbee Sheffield offers a definition of “passionate desire,”4 signaling that level of intensity is the differing factor between eros and other desires, such as epithumia. Gary Alan Scott and William A. Welton also define eros as “passionate desire,”5 and yet they title the second chapter of their book “Six Speeches on Love (Erôs).”6 Seth Benardete, on the other hand, dismisses the concept of desire completely, and adopts the consistent translation of eros as “love,” erastes as “lover,” and eromenos as “beloved” throughout 1 K.J. Dover, Plato’s Symposium, p. 1 2 R.E. Allen, The Dialogues of Plato Volume II: The Symposium, p. 7 3 Leo Strauss, On Plato’s Symposium, p. 252 4 Sheffield, Plato’s Symposium p. 2 5 Scott & Welton, Erotic Wisdom, p. 29 6 Scott & Welton, p. 45 2 his works.7 These are only a few examples, but they help demonstrate the variations in modern translation of eros and the potential confusion that arises from them. In their attempt to make a unifying classification of eros, each of these scholars has failed to develop a consistent and logical methodology explaining how any definition was reached. This is the cause for the various translations. Even though each definition seems to work within our translations, we have no way of justifying the correctness of one over another since we have no foundation on which to build our claims. This crisis of methodology is a true problem for interpreting the Symposium and, unless it is addressed in a thorough and logical manner, will continue to hinder our perception of eros within the text. Although there is no explicit mention of any approach taken towards defining eros, each scholar uses an implied, default technique of equating one Greek word with an English equivalent. This is the source of the varying definitions of “love,” “desire,” and “passionate desire” as each attempts to achieve one overarching, universal truth concerning eros. This system, while useful for philosophical purposes, obscures the true meaning of eros by supposing, without evidencing through fact, that English actually contains a proper one-to-one equivalent word. In the search for such a definition, the true meaning of eros seems to have been lost in the process. Since eros plays such a crucial role in not only the Symposium, but other works as well, we must break out of the habits which have led to our current predicament and start with a new foundation.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • PLATO's SYMPOSIUM J
    50 ccn~ PLATO'S SYMPOSIUM j - - -- ________j e Library of Liberal Arts PLATO'S SYMPOSIUM Tran lated by BENJAMIN JOWETT With an Introduction by FULTON H. ANDERSON Professor of Philosophy, University of Toronto THE LIBERAL ARTS PRESS NEW YORK CONTENTS SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY .. .... ................................... ......... ... ........... 6 EDITOR'S INTRODUCTION ................... ............................................. 7 SYMPOSIUM APOLLODORUS 13 THE SPEECH OF PHAEDRUS ...... .......................... .......................... .. 19 THE SPEECH OF PAU ANIAS ................. ... ................................. ... .. 21 THE SPEECH OF ERYXIMACHUS 27 THE SPEECH OF ARISTOPHAN E .. ............................... .................. 30 THE SPEECH OF AGATHON ............ .............................................. .. 35 THE SPEECH OF SocRATES ................................ .. ................... ..... .. 39 THE SPEECH OF ALCIBIADES ................. ............... ... ........... ...... .... .. 55 8 PLATO INTROD CTION 9 crescendo, and culminates in the report by Socrates on wi dom and epistemology, upon all of which the Symposium ha bearing, learned from the "wi e" woman Diotima. are intertwined, we m ay set down briefly a few of the more general The dialogue i a "reported" one. Plato himself could not have principles which are to be found in it author's many-sided thought. been present at the original party. (What went on there was told The human soul, a cording to Plato, is es entially in motion. time and time again about Athens.) He was a mere boy when it It is li fe and the integration of living functions. A dead soul is a con­ took place. Nor could the narrator Apollodorus have been a guest; _lladiction in terms. Man throughout his whole nature is erotically he was too young at the time. The latter got his report from motivated. His "love" or desire i manifest in three mutually in­ Aristodemus, a guest at the banquet.
    [Show full text]
  • Eros, Storge, Phileo, and Agape
    Eros, Storge, Phileo, and Agape INTRODUCTION II. Storge Love is ambiguous in the English language. A. This is natural affection—family, kin, the There is “Strawberry Shortcake Love.” We love humblest of loves. We love each other simply cats, dogs, and ice cream. This is trite and with- because we are of the family. B. It is negative in Romans 1:31 and 2 Timothy out depth or permanence. There is “Aunt Minnie 3:3, used regarding homosexuals. Love” which is reserved for “special” people C. It is used in withdrawal in 2 Timothy 3:14, 15. who are sweet and lovable. Sometimes it is con- Withdrawal is not excommunication, put- descending. There is “Bowling Team Love” for ting one out of the church. It is what it says, “buddies” in a reciprocal way. Moderns do not withdrawal of fellowship. zero in on “Tough Love.” So there is a Greek word study. However, the III. Phileo Bible is not learned in a seminary; it is learned A. This is tender affection and brotherly love. out on the street with people in local work. (Philadelphia is the city of “brotherly love.”) Footnotes will not preach. Also, the Bible must B. However, sometimes we make too clear a not be reduced to word studies. You can get so distinction between phileo and agape. Be care- ful. There are surprises. Read Titus 2:3, 4; far out on a limb looking at a leaf you forget the Romans 12:9, 10; 1 Corinthians 16:22; He- tree. Word studies can be helpful, but they can brews 13:1; John 16:27; and 1 Peter 1:22.
    [Show full text]
  • Phi 260: History of Philosophy I Prof
    Phi 260: History of Philosophy I Prof. Brandon C. Look University of Kentucky Spring 2007 Plato’s Symposium Although we will be looking at the Symposium as work of philosophy, its literary qualities should not be ignored. It can easily be read as a Comedy in three acts (see below), with a prologue (the conversation between Apollodorus and his friend) and an epilogue (Alcibiades’ drunken, tragic (?) account of his love). Consider also the narrative complexity of the work. By the time we get to Diotima’s speech, we have the following levels of narration: Plato says that Apollodorus says that Aristodemus says that Socrates says that Diotima says…Why is there so much distance placed within the narration? Is it supposed to show us how far away the Truth lies? The six speeches given by the attendants can be group into three pairs: Phaedrus and Pausanias; Eryximachus and Aristophanes; and Agathon and Socrates. 1st speech: Phaedrus • There is no greater good for a young boy than a gentle lover, and for a lover a boy to love. • Consider Phaedrus’ suggestion regarding the nature of the relation between lover and beloved: “if a man in love is found doing something shameful… then nothing would give him more pain than being seen by the boy he loves. … If only we could have cities and armies of lovers…” (178d-179a) So, gays in the military would actually be a good thing, right? • Gods honor virtue most highly when it belongs to Love. (180b) 2nd speech: Pausanias • There are two kinds of love: Urania, or Heavenly Aphrodite, and Pandemos, or Common Aphrodite.
    [Show full text]
  • Marriage in Christ Seminar Follow up Gatherings
    Marriage in Christ Seminar Follow Up Gatherings 1 Contents Simple Instructions ......................................................................................................................... 3 Ordinary life in Christ: “It’s about the little things.” ...................................................................... 4 Protecting Unity by Negotiating Differences ................................................................................. 5 Thinking the Best: Part One ............................................................................................................ 7 Thinking the Best, Part Two ........................................................................................................... 8 The Story of Mother Gerda ............................................................................................................. 9 2 Simple Instructions Schedule about 1 – 1½ hours Gathering Opening prayer Food and conversation o Simple, e.g., potluck, dessert and coffee, wine and cheese, simple brunch, etc. o Sharing about how things have gone for the past several weeks. Share bright spots Highlights of the last week or two Changes that have occurred over time Break into discussion groups o Read the discussion topic (topics can be found on the alumni page of the website) o Discuss the questions Get back together o When do we want to meet next? o Agree to keep praying, talking and acting in your marriages Final Prayer 3 Ordinary life in Christ: “It’s about the little things.” As God's chosen ones,
    [Show full text]
  • Plato's Symposium: the Ethics of Desire
    Plato’s Symposium: The Ethics of Desire FRISBEE C. C. SHEFFIELD 1 Contents Introduction 1 1. Ero¯s and the Good Life 8 2. Socrates’ Speech: The Nature of Ero¯s 40 3. Socrates’ Speech: The Aim of Ero¯s 75 4. Socrates’ Speech: The Activity of Ero¯s 112 5. Socrates’ Speech: Concern for Others? 154 6. ‘Nothing to do with Human AVairs?’: Alcibiades’ Response to Socrates 183 7. Shadow Lovers: The Symposiasts and Socrates 207 Conclusion 225 Appendix : Socratic Psychology or Tripartition in the Symposium? 227 References 240 Index 249 Introduction In the Symposium Plato invites us to imagine the following scene: A pair of lovers are locked in an embrace and Hephaestus stands over them with his mending tools asking: ‘What is it that you human beings really want from each other?’ The lovers are puzzled, and he asks them again: ‘Is this your heart’s desire, for the two of you to become parts of the same whole, and never to separate, day or night? If that is your desire, I’d like to weld you together and join you into something whole, so that the two of you are made into one. Look at your love and see if this is what you desire: wouldn’t this be all that you want?’ No one, apparently, would think that mere sex is the reason each lover takes such deep joy in being with the other. The soul of each lover apparently longs for something else, but cannot say what it is. The beloved holds out the promise of something beyond itself, but that something lovers are unable to name.1 Hephaestus’ question is a pressing one.
    [Show full text]
  • Access Control and Operating System
    Outline (may not finish in one lecture) Access Control and Operating Access Control Concepts Secure OS System Security • Matrix, ACL, Capabilities • Methods for resisting • Multi-level security (MLS) stronger attacks OS Mechanisms Assurance • Multics • Orange Book, TCSEC John Mitchell – Ring structure • Common Criteria • Amoeba • Windows 2000 – Distributed, capabilities certification • Unix Some Limitations – File system, Setuid • Information flow • Windows • Covert channels – File system, Tokens, EFS • SE Linux – Role-based, Domain type enforcement Access control Access control matrix [Lampson] Common Assumption Objects • System knows who the user is File 1 File 2 File 3 … File n – User has entered a name and password, or other info • Access requests pass through gatekeeper User 1 read write - - read – OS must be designed monitor cannot be bypassed User 2 write write write - - Reference Subjects monitor User 3 - - - read read User process ? Resource … User m read write read write read Decide whether user can apply operation to resource Two implementation concepts Capabilities Access control list (ACL) File 1 File 2 … Operating system concept • “… of the future and always will be …” • Store column of matrix User 1 read write - Examples with the resource User 2 write write - • Dennis and van Horn, MIT PDP-1 Timesharing Capability User 3 - - read • Hydra, StarOS, Intel iAPX 432, Eros, … • User holds a “ticket” for … • Amoeba: distributed, unforgeable tickets each resource User m read write write • Two variations References – store
    [Show full text]
  • Research Purpose Operating Systems – a Wide Survey
    GESJ: Computer Science and Telecommunications 2010|No.3(26) ISSN 1512-1232 RESEARCH PURPOSE OPERATING SYSTEMS – A WIDE SURVEY Pinaki Chakraborty School of Computer and Systems Sciences, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi – 110067, India. E-mail: [email protected] Abstract Operating systems constitute a class of vital software. A plethora of operating systems, of different types and developed by different manufacturers over the years, are available now. This paper concentrates on research purpose operating systems because many of them have high technological significance and they have been vividly documented in the research literature. Thirty-four academic and research purpose operating systems have been briefly reviewed in this paper. It was observed that the microkernel based architecture is being used widely to design research purpose operating systems. It was also noticed that object oriented operating systems are emerging as a promising option. Hence, the paper concludes by suggesting a study of the scope of microkernel based object oriented operating systems. Keywords: Operating system, research purpose operating system, object oriented operating system, microkernel 1. Introduction An operating system is a software that manages all the resources of a computer, both hardware and software, and provides an environment in which a user can execute programs in a convenient and efficient manner [1]. However, the principles and concepts used in the operating systems were not standardized in a day. In fact, operating systems have been evolving through the years [2]. There were no operating systems in the early computers. In those systems, every program required full hardware specification to execute correctly and perform each trivial task, and its own drivers for peripheral devices like card readers and line printers.
    [Show full text]
  • Plutarch on the Role of Eros in a Marriage
    1 2 3 4 Plutarch on the Role of Eros in a Marriage 5 6 Jeffrey Beneker 7 8 Plutarch’s thinking on marital relationships has attracted a significant amount 9 of interest in recent years and has been approached from a variety of 10 perspectives. Some scholars have studied the societal aspect of marriage in 11 Plutarch’s works, raising questions about the role of women in the household, 12 in the community, and especially in their interactions with men, and therefore 13 they have tended to address larger social issues, such as gender, sexuality, and 14 equality.1 Others have taken a philosophical tack and have examined Plutarch’s 15 writing, especially as it concerns the nature and value of marriage, in terms of 16 the broader philosophical traditions to which it is related.2 However, my focus 17 in this paper is much more narrow. I intend to explore one particular 18 component of the marital relationship itself: the erotic connection that exists, 19 or might exist, between a husband and wife. Looking first to the Moralia and 20 the dialogue Amatorius, I will argue that Plutarch describes the eros shared 21 between a married couple as an essential prerequisite for the development of 22 philia and virtue. Then, turning to the Lives, I will demonstrate how the ideas 23 found in the Amatorius are fundamental to Plutarch’s representation of 24 marriage in the biographies of Brutus and Pompey. 25 In the Amatorius, Plutarch, who is himself the principal speaker, touches on 26 a variety of topics related to eros, but the discussion itself is motivated by a 27 single event: the wealthy widow Ismenodora has expressed her desire to marry 28 the ephebe Bacchon, who comes from a family of lower social standing.
    [Show full text]
  • From Romantic Jealousy to Sympathetic Joy: Monogamy, Polyamory, and Beyond Jorge N
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by California Institute of Integral Studies libraries Digital Commons @ CIIS International Journal of Transpersonal Studies Advance Publication Archive 2019 From Romantic Jealousy to Sympathetic Joy: Monogamy, Polyamory, and Beyond Jorge N. Ferrer Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.ciis.edu/advance-archive Part of the Feminist, Gender, and Sexuality Studies Commons, Philosophy Commons, Religion Commons, and the Transpersonal Psychology Commons From Romantic Jealousy to Sympathetic Joy: Monogamy, Polyamory, and Beyond Jorge N. Ferrer. Cailornia Institute of Integral Studies San Francisco, CA, USA This paper explores how the extension of contemplative qualities to intimate relationships can transform human sexual/emotional responses and relationship choices. The paper reviews contemporary findings from the field of evolutionary psychology on the twin origins of jealousy and monogamy, argues for the possibility to transform jealousy into sympathetic joy (or compersion), addresses the common objections against polyamory (or nonmonogamy), and challenges the culturally prevalent belief that the only spiritually correct sexual options are either celibacy or (lifelong or serial) monogamy. To conclude, it is suggested that the cultivation of sympathetic joy in intimate bonds can pave the way to overcome the problematic dichotomy between monogamy and polyamory, grounding individuals in a radical openness to the dynamic unfolding of life
    [Show full text]
  • The Lesson of Plato's Symposium
    University of South Florida Scholar Commons Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate School 2005 Eros, Paideia and Arête: The Lesson of Plato’s Symposium Jason St. John Oliver Campbell University of South Florida Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd Part of the American Studies Commons Scholar Commons Citation Campbell, Jason St. John Oliver, "Eros, Paideia and Arête: The Lesson of Plato’s Symposium" (2005). Graduate Theses and Dissertations. https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/2806 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Eros, Paideia and Arête: The Lesson of Plato’s Symposium by Jason St. John Oliver Campbell A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Masters of Arts Department of Philosophy College of Arts and Sciences University of South Florida Major Professor: Joanne B. Waugh Ph.D. Charles Guignon, Ph.D. Martin Schöenfeld, Ph.D. Date of Approval: April 14, 2005 Keywords: Ancient Greece, Socrates, Education, Pedagogy, Sunousia © 2005, Jason St. John Oliver Campbell Acknowledgments I wish to extend a debt of gratitude to Professor Joanne B. Waugh for her continued dedication throughout the completion of this thesis. Table of Contents Abstract ii General Introduction 1 Chapter One 4 Introduction 4 Mousikē: The First Component
    [Show full text]
  • What Is Science-Based Bioethics?
    Science-based Bioethics Ch. 1 Introduction Loike & Fischbach Chapter One What is Science-based Bioethics? Introduction Each year, biotechnology bravely ventures into unexplored scientific territory. The year 2016 was no exception: The number of scientific breakthroughs that emerged during this year is overwhelming with gene editing (CRISPR) technologies, gene drives to eliminate harmful mosquitos, and synthetic DNA topping the list. As will be discussed in Chapter Eight, scientists have developed ingenious methods to edit the DNA code of the human genome in cells, embryos, and human beings. Equally astonishing are the reports of two new synthetic DNA bases that have been synthesized. Applying this synthetic biology technology, scientists have expanded the DNA code from 4 to 6 base pairs (Malyshev et al., 2014). Yet, the real dangers of gene editing, synthetic biology, and the creation of a synthetic human genome remain unknown, raising the question whether humankind is dramatically overstepping innate ethical boundaries. In May of 2016, a closed door meeting convened to discuss the issue of constructing an entire human genome in a cell line, a project prospectively titled ‘HGP-Write: Testing Large Synthetic Genomes in Cells’. As the New York Times reports, the meeting was invite-only and “The nearly 150 attendees were told not to contact the news media or to post on Twitter during the meeting.” In the past year, neuroscience research has led to countless innovations as well. Selected examples include: a) stem cell and genetic technologies to enhance the cognition and learning potential of mice, b) brain rejuvenation of older mice to their youthful plasticity with stem cell technologies, c) artificial intelligence in human-like robots (see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0_DPi0PmF0 for a dramatic video about human-like robots), and d) genetically modified bacteria that can function as biological circuits.
    [Show full text]
  • Mixed-Criticality Scheduling and Resource Sharing for High-Assurance Operating Systems
    Mixed-Criticality Scheduling and Resource Sharing for High-Assurance Operating Systems Anna Lyons Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy School of Computer Science and Engineering University of New South Wales Sydney, Australia September 2018 Abstract Criticality of a software system refers to the severity of the impact of a failure. In a high-criticality system, failure risks significant loss of life or damage to the environ- ment. In a low-criticality system, failure may risk a downgrade in user-experience. As criticality of a software system increases, so too does the cost and time to develop that software: raising the criticality also raises the assurance level, with the highest levels requiring extensive, expensive, independent certification. For modern cyber-physical systems, including autonomous aircraft and other vehicles, the traditional approach of isolating systems of different criticality by using completely separate physical hardware, is no longer practical, being both restrictive and inefficient. The result is mixed-criticality systems, where software applications with different criticalities execute on the same hardware. Sufficient mechanisms are required to ascertain that software in mixed-criticality systems is sufficiently isolated, otherwise, all software on that hardware is promoted to the highest criticality level, driving up costs to impractical levels. For mixed-criticality systems to be viable, both spatial and temporal isolation are required. Current aviation standards allow for mixed-criticality systems where temporal and spatial resources are strictly and statically partitioned in time and space, allowing some improvement over fully isolated hardware. However, further improvements are not only possible, but required for future innovation in cyber-physical systems.
    [Show full text]